September
17. Initial NEPA (environmental) review information meeting including NEPA
Purpose and need and preferred alternative and the intial Federal Highway
evaluation (which is online). This was held and provided an opportunity to
inteact with the reviewers and to file comment cards. These can also be filed
at https://tinyurl.com/JPImprovements.
October 2018 the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) isssued
a 3 page summary of status to the stakeholder groups including JPAC. Read.
The first 2 steps including historic inventory are done. Now
being determined are effect in prepartation for public consulting party (CP)
and public meetings (CPs have been giving topics and feedback) "As
noted above, we have completed the first two steps of the Section 106 process
and are in the process of assessing adverse effects. Within the coming weeks,
after the draft AOE is complete, the City will notify the consulting parties
and the public of its availability for review and comment. The City will also
schedule a meeting for consulting parties and a public information
meeting to provide an overview of the draft AOE and seek feedback."Related UPARR move of recreational designation from the OPC is also
under determination and community assessment.

August 2018: OBAMA
CENTER AND HISTORICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS UPDATES

September
17, Monday, 6 pm. Initial NEPA (environmental) review information meeting
including NEPA Purpose and need and preferred alternative and the intial Federal
Highway evaluation (which is online). South Shore Cultural Center, 7059 South
Shore Drive. National Park Service and various federal and
local agencies will host.

OBAMA CENTER. The Section 106 and other reviews of historic
and environmental effects and impacts of proposed changes, and any ameliorations/mitigations
that will be required in a Memorandum of Agreement for the OPC to proceed,
and for the road changes to proceed, will not be completed until early next
year. The final Historic Properties Inventory is still scheduled to be released
this summer. Next up in late summer/early fall is a meeting (“3rd”)
that includes a report on “impacts” and on preferred alternatives
for lost recreational land/fields. This fall will see: the “4th”
Section 106 historic properties Consulting Parties meeting (JPAC is included),
the final Memorandum on that, and the environmental (NEPA) finding that will
be subject of a public meeting in late 2018. The final federal finding is
due in early 2019. There are varying views about how the review process should
go, and the assumptions under which it operates, and involved is lots of material,
staff time, thought, and likely negotiation, not to mention the volumes of
comments and testimony to be sorted. Conclusions and reaction to some or all--will
likely be, or viewed as subjective.

Meanwhile: (1) The city is preparing a complete, updated lease contract/ ordinance
specifying the site and terms of use for OPC operation--this should go before
City Council at the end of summer or early fall and is expected to factor
into the lawsuit re: siting and use of park land for the OPC. (2) In response
to the review and other delays, the official groundbreaking and start are
now pushed back by the OPC to some time in 2019. Michael Strautmanis of the
Foundation is quoted in the Tribune that they “knew there were some
things that were not in our control. We insist on going through the process
with integrity and without rushing.” They have pledged that no tree
removal or work on their intended 19.3 acre site (which is north of 62nd St.)
will happen until all reviews and approvals are received

The timelines of the city’s final ordinance and the
Protect Our Parks lawsuit vs. City of Chicago and Chicago Park District before
U.S. District Judge John Blakey

• January 2015 City Council passed an ordinance allowing the city to
enter into agreement to transfer a parcel in Jackson Park for subsequent transfer.
It was not specific, for example not authorizing an agreement with a user
or of course what such terms could be. Also, much including the proposed footprint
changed afterwards. The state also passed an enabling amendment to the parks
law.

• May 2018 a lawsuit was filed by Protect Our Parks organization.

• May 17 the Chicago Plan Commission heard and approved the OPC, road
changes, a replacement track and more but did not include the specifics mentioned
above.

May 22 the Zoning Committee, and May 23 City Council approved the same as
the Plan Commission, the new turf track, road changes and more including preliminary
(“Local Partner” declaration of what it wants to do was, inter
alia, said needed for the federal reviews continuing although, but, one speculates,
not necessarily to their conclusion.

• In May, the judge set a status hearing for the lawsuit for July.
City and park district filed requests stating grounds (May 30 and later) for
extension to file (Rule 12(b) motions to dismiss. June 4, without dissent
from the plaintiffs, the judge set July 9 for defendants filing and July 30
to file responses to motions to dismiss, August 6 for plaintiffs to respond
and August 9 for a motion hearing.

• July 28 the defendants asked to push back this schedule until a complete
ordinance is passed-- “after an ordinance governing significant aspects
of the Obama Presidential Center’s Operation in Jackson Park is introduced
to the City Council and the City Council chooses to enact it. The ordinance
would provide the necessary legislative authorization for the City to enter
into an agreement with the Foundation addressing how the foundation will be
permitted to use the site, and would also approve the terms of the agreement,
which would be attached and included into the ordinance.” They argued
in effect that the lawsuit cannot be resolved until and unless there is an
action- a law implementing what the lawsuit seeks to stop and that no damage
will be done to the plaintiffs because no work can proceed on the site until
after the ordinance and an agreement with the OP Foundation is in effect.
(A complication is that work in the new track site the site would start before
that redefinition of site is officially made—work has since started,
see below.) July 9 the court granted defendants’ motion to strike August
9 hearing and set the status hearing (including for case management dates)
as August 28, 9:45 a.m. at the Dirksen Courthouse, 219 S. Dearborn, room 1203.
Dates of course may change.

• August 14 – hearing on plaintiffs’ motion to delay or
stop work and construction on the track site and move up hearings. (See outcome
in next section on the Track and Field- holds/stays on trial and on track
and field construction were lifted.)

• Status check schedule was set date for hearing (after the city has
passed an ordinance, according to the judge), next full hearing date including
on each party’s motion for summary dismissal, is October 28.

• September 12
plaintifs filed "motion to correct the record" for "material
misrepresentations" regarding connections between the track and the Obama
Center re: February 26 agreement on funding from the Obama Foundation for
the track, and following statements.

Track and Field south of 62nd St. Work was started the 4th
weekend of July on a new, updated artificial track and field on the northeast
corner of 63rd and Stony Island. Arrangements have been made with the sports
teams that had been using the ball fields on that site—they’ve
been using these all summer. The replacement track and field (but not the
displaced ball fields) will be paid for by the Obama Foundation. The present
track and field is presently in the OPC proposed site. The new site is proposed
by the city to be not part of that site (see above). Plans were in motion
(and are hard to stop without penalties and higher costs et al) before the
review and approval processes were set back, so that summer break could be
used to get a new track in place by fall for the teams and public to use without
disruption. That exact and tight timetable had long been public. This is nevertheless
irrelevant if the PD is correct that this remains their land with right of
action and this is not land they intend to turn over to OPC where they said
work will not start until all is resolved.) After the track and field work
began and trees cut down, the plaintiffs to the lawsuit filed to stop the
work. Note that this could have denied the sports teams and public their improved
field and left a very visible part of the park messy and fenced.

The judge on August 14 did not grant plaintiff’s motion and lifted the
temporary hold on construction and said he would see the parties back after
the city passed the OPC ordinance and lease agreement and lifted the hold
on the suit--the parties can move forward with discovery, subpoenas, et al
including how Jackson Park became the site for OPC, for the larger lawsuit.
Not addressed were arguments that damage was done by trees removal (note-
many of these were dead or dying) and possible damage to historic remains
or their becoming less (note- the track is mostly above ground and historic
inventory so far indicates what’s underground does not have historic
value sufficient of excavation).

Statement in letter to the Sun-Times by CPD Director of Planning and Construction
August 16 2018.

The Chicago Sun-Times
editorial’s assertion that the Chicago Park District jumped the starter’s
pistol in Jackson Park disregards the public process leading to the construction
of the new track and field.
The Chicago Park District held numerous public hearings over the past year
to gather community input and roll out plans to relocate the Jackson Park
track and field. In fact, the District held nine public meetings as part
of the South Lakefront Planning Process during which the project was discussed.
The Park District also attended additional meetings organized by community
stakeholders to keep residents informed of the projects timeline.
During these meetings, representative restated plans to complete the track
and field in time to accommodate the local schools’ fall sports schedules.
At no time did the Park District representatives indicate the project would
be delayed, as evidenced by the Lakefront Protection application filed in
2 January approved in May, giving the district authority to proceed. Prior
to filing the application, the district also mailed notices to all property
owners within 500 feet of the site.
As recently as April 11, Park Distict representatives presented information
about the Jackson P ark track and field, including a schedule to start construction
this summer. Plans for the project were heard and approved by the Chicago
Plan Commission and documents relating to the track and field, including
a tree removal diagram were posted on the City’s website in May. Contrary
to the Sun-times accusations, the Chicago Park District is not violating
any federal processes, as this is a local project and is not subject to
federal review.
Despite the Editorial Board’s criticism, this process is neither premature
nor bad form. The Chicago Park District operated transparently and in a
manner that demonstrates responsibility and respect for the community being
served.

More about the
track and to think about: First, this is an opportunity to get a
renewed and better multi-sport field. It may not be completely ideal because
the field will be wider and accommodate more sports and amenities but the
site is a bit narrower creating a squeeze on layout partly to save trees around
the perimeter (excepting numerous dead and dying ashes such as along Stony
Island). Some replacement and new trees are in the drawings, but numerous
trees in the center are lost. We should insist at the least that net lost
trees be replaced promptly within the park. A possible ball field east of
Cornell Drive has not been resolved yet. Another ball field needs to find
a replacement site outside of Jackson Park, according to a federal review
finding from the Urban Parks/National Parks Service. That will doubtless be
part of the quest to assemble new parkland in Woodlawn (a suite of city-owned
lots in the 64th-Kimbark area is said to be identified) that could also make
up some acreage or green space lost to the OPC in Jackson Park.

In other news, the Foundation and the hired Lakeside Alliance
general contractor and the hiring and training consultant firm and newly hired
monitor are taking first steps in recruiting, training and developing a subcontracting
and career workforce team that meet the promised high local and minority standards.
Lakefront Alliance is now sited at Black United Fund of Illinois, 1750 E.
71st St. http://www.lakesidealliance.com.
And, as reported in its just released Annual Report, the Foundation has started
and participated in community, antiviolence, and civic leadership training
initiatives and issued a broad commitment of promises document. Nevertheless
a coalition seeks a community benefits agreement enforced by city ordinance
that includes 30 percent affordable/low income set aside in new housing, a
tax freeze, rent increase regulation, independent monitoring of jobs for OPC
and other development, support for schools, a community investment fund, and
means of addressing forces and practices, and lack of services, hurting communities.

Schedule
of meetings and process (See
in above feature or the Section 106 website for latest schedule.)

A Section 4(f)
review is also triggered by the CDOT road proposals under the US Department
of Transportation Act, - impact on parkland and historic sites during
transportation project development.
A 4(f) review is especially important because it requires substantive
consideration of alternatives to proposed road projects. The role of
this review seems unclear as projects (as is the case of Section 106)
cannot be denied just mitigated on the basis of findings, but on the
other hand Section 106 findings become part of the process for 4(f).

UPARR (Urban Parks
And Recreational Recovery Act)- a recommendation with regard to displaced
baseball fields due to OPC is in process.

Because improvements
and programs in Jackson Park were funded by several grants under the
UPARR program, recreational areas in the park cannot be converted to
non-recreational use unless certain conditions are met and approval
by the National Park Service is forthcoming. One of the conditions is
provision of appropriate alternate parkland.)

General schedule

January/February 2018Public meeting(s)
hosted by CPD in preparation for final steps of the South Lakefront Framework
Plan update

Mid-February 2018Section 106 Historic
Properties Inventory Report issued for review by consulting parties and
the general public(includes any
changes to the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for architecture or the list
of historic resources within the APE boundary)

Mid-February 2018
Public meeting(s) hosted by the Obama Foundation, CDOT, and CPD in preparation
for Plan Commission hearing

Introduction
The City of Chicago, through the Department of Planning and Development (DPD)
and the Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT), is working on several
roadway improvement projects in Jackson Park and the Midway Plaisance that
will support the Obama Presidential Center (OPC) and the South Lakefront Plan
update.

When these projects are completed, they will support a revitalized Jackson
Park. Since it was originally designed by renowned landscape architects Olmsted
& Vaux in 1871, Jackson Park has undergone multiple transformations in
the last one hundred years which have altered the original design, including
as the site of the World’s Columbian Exposition in 1893.

The Chicago Park District’s South Lakefront Framework Plan (1999) outlined
many of the proposed improvements now under consideration. The Park District
is engaged in a planning process to update the South Lakefront Framework Plan,
specifically for Jackson Park and South Shore Cultural Center. The 2017 Framework
Plan update will create a plan for the next ten years to respond to neighborhood
needs and historic context, provide a vision for improvements, serve as a
planning tool and outline priorities to deliver improvements in a coordinated
manner.

Various proposed park projects and accompanying roadway changes within Jackson
Park require a federal-level environmental review under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) as well as consultation under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. For these purposes, the city will prepare a document
known as an “Environmental Assessment” (EA), which will be formally
titled “Obama Presidential Center Mobility Improvements to Support
the South Lakefront Framework Plan”.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation
Act (Section 106)
NEPA and Section 106 are separate – but related – processes. When
both are required, they must be completed concurrently, under the direction
of a lead federal agency. In this case, the lead agency is the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA). The City will conduct the review process in conjunction
with the Federal agencies.
Purpose of Environmental Review

The purpose of this review is to provide a process for FHWA to work
closely with the City of Chicago, the State Historic Preservation Office,
other federal and state agencies, and the public to evaluate and, if necessary,
mitigate the effects of the projects.
For more information on FHWA’s NEPA process, please visit their website
at: www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/index.asp

Both NEPA and Section106 require that federal agencies study the impacts of
proposed plans on historic sites, buildings, and other cultural resources.
Jackson Park is listed on the National Register as part of the Jackson Park
and Midway Plaisance Historic Landscape District. The evaluation of potential
impacts to historic resources, including Jackson Park, will be an important
component of the review process.

Public Participation
Community input will aid the City and Federal agencies in the identification
of important cultural landscape features, architectural and ecological resources,
and impacts to these resources.
To facilitate these discussions, the City will host community events as we
move through the process during 2017 and 2018. All members of the public are
invited to attend.

Meeting dates will be posted on this webpage as the project advances. Certain
parties, such as the State Historical Preservation Officer and local government
representatives, are designated “consulting parties” in the Section
106 process.
Other individuals or organizations may be invited to become consulting parties
as well, or they may request consulting party status. More information on
the role and designation of a consulting party can be found in the Citizen’s
Guide to the Section 106 Process.
More information on the Section 106 process can be found at the following
link: www.achp.gov/106summary.html.

Schedule of Events
This schedule will be updated to include public meetings for the South Lakefront
Planning process, the Obama Presidential Center and the Federal Review process
for Jackson Park as they are announced.
To complete Section 106, the City will host the following Section 106 Task
Force meetings

Section 106 Task Force meetings are intended to be working meetings for cooperating
agencies and consulting parties.
Parallel to the Section 106 Task Force meetings, the project team will host
two public meetings to discuss additional topics under NEPA and to provide
updates on Section 106 Task Force progress. The NEPA process will culminate
in a formal public hearing.
The proposed OPC project and proposed roadway improvements will also be vetted
by the Chicago Plan Commission and City Council through the required public
hearing process.

Additional Resources
Area of Potential Effect – Archaeology Map
This draft map depicts the areas of Jackson Park where historic artifacts
may be found underground and will guide the excavation process to confirm.
Area of Potential Effect – Architecture Map
This draft map depicts the boundary around Jackson Park where environmental
impacts will be evaluated. The boundary is larger than the park itself to
consider any impacts to adjacent properties or properties within the viewshed
of the proposed development.
Proposed Improvements to Jackson Park
• Chicago Park District’s South Lakefront Framework Plan Update
(SLFP)
• Obama Presidential Center (OPC)

Part
2- Section 106. Process and Documents, Evaluation (summary
by Gary Ossewaarde of the handout and presentation at the Kickoff Working
Meeting at South Side YMCA December 1, 2017.(In quotes are from the notice of review process
to consulting parties or materials in the site for this review, https://tinyurl.com/JPImprovements
late 2107.) 76 organizations, groups, and institutions/stakeholders were invited
to be consulting parties and 40-60 responded or joined later. These have a
demonstrated legal or economic interest or concern about historic properties.
Locally these include Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Conference, Hyde Park Historical
Society, Jackson Park Advisory Council, Jackson Park Watch, Midway Park Advisory
Council, and Nichols Park Advisory Council. Note there is a dual public engagement
process: Invite-only working meetings of cooperating agencies and the consulting
parties and two public meetings and a public hearing on the resultant Environmental
Assessment. See also links below.Where can I submit comments? dpd@cityofchicago.org.
Formal designation for the proposed resultant Environmental Assessment (EA):Obama Presidential Center Mobility Improvements to
Support the South Lakefront Framework Plan.

Purpose of Review:
“The purpose of this review is to provide a process for FHWA to work
closely with the City of Chicago, the State Historic Preservation Office,
other federal and state agencies, and the public to evaluate and, if necessary,
mitigate the effects of the projects.

Why is this necessary?
“Various proposed park projects [most notably the Obama Presidential
Center] and accompanying roadway changes within Jackson Park [on the National
Register of Historic Places] require a federal-level environmental review
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as well as consultation
under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.” For these
purposes, the city will prepare a document known as an “Environmental
Assessment” (EA), which will be formally titled “Obama Presidential
Center Mobility Improvements to Support the South Lakefront Framework Plan”.”
The review will also inform the revision of the 1999 South Lakefront Framework
Plan- a process in progress.

Who and what?
Section 106 review has started. The NEPA Environmental review is to be announced
in early 2018. The two must be completed concurrently. Important in the process
is evaluation of potential impacts to historic resources, including cultural
landscape features, architectural and ecological resources.

The conveners and conductors of the work are the City of Chicago Department
of Planning (Eleanor Gorski an Abby Monroe) and Development and Department
of Transportation (John Sadler).
The Lead Agency is the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

The series of Working Meetings of the Cooperating Agencies and the
Consulting Parties began with a Kickoff December 1, with which included
a power point on the process, a proposed Historic Resources Inventory of Structures
and Cultural Resources, and the Historical and Archeological Resources Inventory
maps. Many groups submitted comments.

Task Force Working meetings 2-4 had not yet been scheduled- they will cover
(2) Results of the Historic Resources Identification Study Area (comments
due January 5),

(3 and 4) Effects Assessment and Mitigation Measures.

Two public meetings and the public hearing on the proposed Effects Assessment
and Mitigation Measures.

From the Section 106 Consulting Parties Kick off Meeting
OPC Mobility Improvements to Support the South Lakefront Framework Plan
This process does not focus on the golf proposal.
Only the following from a Framework Plan requires federal review- Roadway improvements due to roadway closures – under
Federal Highway AdministrationPotential conversion of parkland to non-recreational use
under Urban Parks Recreation and Recreation Recovery Program (UPARR) - under
National Park Service

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 requires federal agencies to assess
environmental effects prior to making decisions.
Essential elements under NPEA: Purpose and Need, Alternatives, Impacts, Mitigation,
Public Involvement, Interagency Coordination, Documentation
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Agencies must take into account the effects on historic properties and
Afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity
to comment on such undertakings

What are the
“undertakings” here?
Roadway improvements with potential federal funding and
The OPC and related Framework Plan improvements (the said potential conversion
of parkland to non-recreational use as defined in UPARR.
Section 106 regulations describe the process for identifying historic properties
and assess effects and mitigations.

What historic properties? Those listed or eligible for listing on
the National Register of Historic Places.
Section 106 review is done under NEPA because NEPA oversees Historic Resources
(others are Noise, Traffic, Wildlife/Habitat, Air and Water Quality, and Socioeconomics).
Under Historic Resources mandate is Section 106, under which are Archeology
and Architecture.
NEPA process is led by FHWA in coordination with other federal, state, and
local agencies. Chicago DPD and CDOT will facilitate. (Who says so? Advisory
Council on Historic preservation – ACHP).)

Parallel: project team
host public meetings on added NEPA topics (see above) and provide updatesEstablishing the Areas of Potential Effect (APE)
Definition: APE is the geographic area where the project could have an effect
on historic resources.Archaeology. Method of determination- considering areas of
disturbanceArchitecture. Method of determination-Considering the full
range of effects including direct physical, visual, and audial.
The Archaeological Survey.

The Illinois State Archeological Survey (ISAS) is conducting the survey to
identify potential underground historic resources, focusing on locations where
there could be potential for ground disturbance. 11/12/17-Spring 2018.
Architecture Scope within Jackson Park and the parts of the Midway (east of
the viaduct)including buildings and structures, landscape features, sculpture/art
and site furnishings.
Potentially eligible buildings will be researched to provide description,
history and development, and National Register eligibility.
Architecture Scope outside Jackson Park and Midway (i.e. west of the viaduct)
Hyde Park Area- majority already included in the Hyde Park-Kenwood National
Register District.
Woodlawn Area- Reconnaissance-level survey to identify historic properties.

Criteria. Properties must be 50 years old or older and meet with at
least one of the following (to be eligible for National Register listing):
A- associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history or
B- associated with the lives of persons significant in our past or
C- embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,
or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values,
or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components
may lack individual distinction or
D- that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history.
It must possess sufficient integrity to convey its significance.
Properties of exceptional significance but less than 50 years old may also
be considered.

Olmsted’s Design Principles
-The Lake with broad views of Lake Michigan from a Shore Drive
-Fields of pastoral landscapes designed for strolling, tennis and croquet,
and baseball, with golf added later
-Lagoons that were secluded and provided scenery from shore and boats
-Columbian Museum that added formal architectural design

- Project team identifies potential historic properties (eligible or listed
on NRHP) in the APE
-Team prepare document HISTORIC PROPERTIES INVENTORY REPORT with documentary
photos and analysis of historic eligibility.
-Report is reviewed by public and consulting partners, comments collected.
-In consultation with the state SHPO, FWA makes ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS
-All Consulting Parties receive a copy of the Historic Properties inventory
Report by email at least a week prior to next meeting.
For meeting 2, consulting parties are asked to come prepared to discuss the
HISTORIC PROPERTIES INVENTORY REPORT
Engage in group discussion on the same
Start to assess effects to historic properties.

Section 106 historical
and archaeological review of park resources and proposal impacts was started
and a Task Force kickoff meeting was held December 1. (Watch for a similar,
coterminous process for the NEPA Environmental Review to be announced.) See
more details in the November minutes (in Dec. Newsletter)
and in the extensive power point online at https://tinyurl.com/JPImprovements
where comments-- including about specific or missed historical resources in
the park can be submitted. Admittance to the small hall was mostly limited
to 2 representatives from each the many Consulting Parties, although there
was a live-streaming overflow room (not full). The presentation was quite
detailed and the floor was opened to many questions about process and specifics
and statements, some expressing strong support for or else skepticism about
the proposals and/ or their potential effects on the historic features.
Some of the comments: Golf and South Shore Cultural Center footprints have
to be in this or have a review- please clarify. The rest of the Midway should
be included in the study area. The site has shifted- please study that. Are
the costs a potential damage? It’s exciting to see everybody interested
in Jackson Park because we think it’s an amazing place- Olmsted would
be proud. These reviews cannot be successful without knowing the tree etc.
loses, gains and changes. Will the review consider effects of road changes
including on access to harbors? The Obama Center will partner with Hyde Park
High for a great gain. Jackson Park Highlands survey overwhelmingly supported
the Center; I view the Museum building as a beacon of hope and change. It’s
good the process is happening but it needs to answer all the questions and
deal with all the concerns. If a large set of adverse effects are found, could
there be a basis to recommend cancellation/movement elsewhere? (answer- this
process does not provide for a go/no go recommendation but requirement to
fix found problems before work can co forward). Michal Strautmanis of the
Foundation told the Tribune after the meeting, “.. we saw a lot of interest
and a lot of excitement. What could be seen as an arcane historic review process…
we had people who are interested in the process come participate…. That
type of civic engagement is exciting.”

The next steps for the project are to identify historic resources and their
eligibility (under criteria) and the “Area of Potential Effect”
including an inventory with eligibility determinations, and to review these
with the consulting parties. After: to assess found adverse effects (which
also have criteria) and review and resolve towards a recommendation, public
hearings and Memoranda of Agreement. The next sets of meetings are for the
Task Force teams with the consulting parties.

Environmental and Section
106 review and surveys of historical/archeological resources/ environmental
impacts of proposed projects. Eleanor Gorski of the Chicago Department of
Planning described the scope of the work, required by law when funds are to
be spent in public spaces that are on the National Register of Historic Places
(i.e. Jackson and Midway1972) to assess resources and what might be adversity
impacted and need mitigation. The two reviews will be led by the Federal Highway
Administration, but a host of federal, state and city agencies including EPA
and Illinois Archeological Survey are involved. The Chicago Dept. of Planning
and Development, with Transportation (together the “Applicant”)
will do the heavy lifting of the survey and the task force that includes a
large number of Consulting Party (CP) organizations and groups and the public
hearing. JPAC is among nearly 60 participating CPs. The boundary of historic
resources extends 1 to several blocks beyond Jackson and South Shore parks
and Midway Plaisance east of the railway, areas that are or may be eligible
to be in historic districts or the National Register. Foundations of former
historic structures on the Obama Center proposed footprint, work-affected
roadways and a set of spots throughout the park will be bored and probed at
the 6’, 12’ and 24’ levels. The physical work (started)
is expected to take at least several months. Task Force kickoff invite meeting
is December 1. Visit https://tinyurl.com/JPImprovements where reports and
meetings will posted and comments taken. Members said they welcome not only
the review itself and the chance for the public to weigh in on a new set of
matters but also the opportunity to learn more of the park’s great past,
many incarnations, and design principles.

From December 2017 JPAC
Newsletter - news p 4

Section 106 historical
and archaeological review of park resources and proposal impacts was started
and a Task Force kickoff meeting was held December 1. (Watch for a similar,
coterminous process for the NEPA Environmental Review to be announced.) See
more details in the November minutes above and in the extensive power point
online at https://tinyurl.com/JPImprovements where comments-- including about
specific or missed historical resources in the park can be submitted. [This
is not current- submit to dpd@cityofchicago.org.] Admittance to the small
hall was mostly limited to 2 representatives from each the many Consulting
Parties, although there was a live-streaming overflow room (not full). The
presentation was quite detailed and the floor was opened to many questions
about process and specifics and statements, some expressing strong support
for or else skepticism about the proposals and/ or their potential effects
on the historic features.

Some of the comments: Golf and South Shore Cultural
Center footprints have to be in this or have a review- please clarify. The
rest of the Midway should be included in the study area. The site has shifted-
please study that. Are the costs a potential damage? It’s exciting to
see everybody interested in Jackson Park because we think it’s an amazing
place- Olmsted would be proud. These reviews cannot be successful without
knowing the tree etc. loses, gains and changes. Will the review consider effects
of road changes including on access to harbors? The Obama Center will partner
with Hyde Park High for a great gain. Jackson Park Highlands survey overwhelmingly
supported the Center; I view the Museum building as a beacon of hope and change.
It’s good the process is happening but it needs to answer all the questions
and deal with all the concerns. If a large set of adverse effects are found,
could there be a basis to recommend cancellation/movement elsewhere? (answer-
this process does not provide for a go/no go recommendation but requirement
to fix found problems before work can co forward). Michal Strautmanis of the
Foundation told the Tribune after the meeting, “.. we saw a lot of interest
and a lot of excitement. What could be seen as an arcane historic review process…
we had people who are interested in the process come participate…. That
type of civic engagement is exciting.”

The next steps for the project are for the project with Task Force to identify
historic resources and their eligibility (under criteria) and the “Area
of Potential Effect” including an inventory with eligibility determinations,
and to review these with the consulting parties. After: assess any found adverse
effects (which also have criteria) and review and resolve towards a recommendation,
public hearings and Memoranda of Agreement.

One
person's stabs at comments. (See also comments
at the December 1 meeting- above)
By Gary Ossewaarde

By Gary Ossewaarde, Jackson
Park Advisory Council Secretary, garyossewaarde@yahoo.com.
I am presenting the following as mine, not official communication of JPAC.
If they should be in another format or sent to another place, please let me
know.
Comments on the Historic Properties Inventory Report.
I have not received the report so can only comment on what was in the Kickoff
meeting document.

Darrow Bridge is listed as a historic feature. It is on the National Register
(as part of the whole park, not in itself, apparently?) It is not listed as
having City Landmark Designation, but it is said it is included as subsidiary
to the Museum designation- is that true, and when was the Museum declared
a Chicago Landmark? It would seem not to be effected except that the coming
of the OPC and replacement of Cornell Drive with new paths to create a “campus”
with MSI would be encouragement to replace/restore the bridge.

I presume the final Report will prioritize the features. Will Chicago Landmark
Designation have any role in priorities?

Were no features more recent than 50 years considered potentially eligible?
If so but not deemed special enough to be included, they should be noted if
excluded just because of the year of building, since they may be eligible
later-- caution should be given regarding changes to them.

How much does listing as eligible preclude changes, and what kinds and degree
of changes to them, especially if no impact from the project is considered
likely? Example: some scenarios for the Framework Plan suggest moving monuments
or structures such as the Statue of the Republic. I think moving of the Cheney-Goode
monument to greater prominence and recognition as part of a Women’s
History Square would be much to the good whether there is any garage for OPC
on the east end of the Midway or not.
Likewise, some could be repurposed and so have interior changes- example the
former Coast Guard Station. Other structures such as Darrow Bridge may have
to accommodate modern bridge codes.

Among features that, unless OPC designs are changed, will definitely be greatly
altered is the Perennial Garden. Is the new design precluded if the current
garden concept is considered an eligible priority?

Certain historic landscape and circulation features are only implicitly mentioned,
but I think merit consideration in their own right—the Music Court and
the “hill” and fortress where the original WCE La Rabida monastery
replica stood and the reproduction Columbus ships were moored, at the end
of Promontory Drive circle. Possibly also the historic “Jewish”
beach on the Silurian reef shore east of La Rabida (the reef itself is still
there).

I do not consider the current Cornell highway to be an historic road, but
it was a country park road under Olmsted’s plans so even if removed
and converted to bike and pedestrian use and not just softened, the replacement
should approximate the original alignment and be plain as a park arterial
path.

As to effects of the OPC on historic features. First, OPC structures and that
fortunately are not on top of underground features (mainly WCE structure foundations)
but they seem to directly abut- excavation work mitigation such as coffering
may be necessary. This includes the Perennial Garden if that is ultimately
to be altered, and possibly to-be-vacated east Midway Plaisance Drive.
The only off site historic feature in Jackson Park that it seems to me might
be affected is the Statue of the Republic depending on changes to Hayes Drive/Richards
intersection due to the OPC needs.

Will golf consolidation likely need a separate assessment? Seems to be "yes"
once it passes beyond concept stage.

Tree replacement including of some clusters will be a major consequence of
OPC the work as well as removal of Cornell Drive and adding lanes to stony
Island and turning radii etc on Hayes and on Lake Shore Drive- presumably
that will be considered under landscape as well as later in the environmental
survey.

MEETING
2 ON THE INVENTORY AND ARCHEOLOGY REPORTS MARCH 29 2018

The second meeting
was held March 29 at Logan Center. See reports links in https://tinyurl.com/jpimprovements.Blair Kamin published an excellent preview and summary in the March
25 Tribune, page (Link to follow). Here is what this writer (GMO) knows so
far:
The IDOT archeological survey- IHAS Technical Report 184
(237 pages!) turned up fascinating remnants, especially from the Columbian
Exposition. (Archeologists are asking the Obama Foundation to display some
in the OPC Museum.) However, the report by state officials (including the
chief archeologist for the Illinois Dept. of Transportation Brad Koldehoff
and under auspices of ISAS Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois
Champaign-Urbana) says that none of the artifacts, although interesting, provide
substantial new knowledge about the park and therefore do not merit their
listing, in themselves, on the National Register of Historic Places. Such
finding has to be vetted and affirmed by the process including state preservation
officials (the agents under the National Trust Act), of course. Such finding
could slow approvals and building of the OPC considerably.
In addition to the archeology report, the updated Inventory of historic properties
affected by the OPC-- this is expected to be much more contentious and has
elicited the most public comment by far.
The archeological survey, conducted by the Illinois State Archeological Survey
(ISAS), began in late 2017, dug or bored at seven sites in Jackson Park and
the east end of the Midway likely to feel impacts from OPC disturbance or
hold things that might feel an impact. They did NOT find categories that would
raise a red flag--building foundations, statuary, or intact columns, for example,
according to the report written by Clare Tolmie and Paula Porubcan Branstner
of the ISAS.
They instead found 9,841 artifacts from various periods,
definitely including the Columbian Exposition. "Many," Kamin says,
were found on the OPC footprint, including on the south end of the OPC site
lots of fragments from Fair buildings made of staff-- mostly white, but some
of red (8) and one of amber colors suggesting they are from the Louis Sullivan-designed
Transportation Building (near the OPC site). The staff (plaster) fragments
may well help in identifying the shades of Fair buildings, which flourished
before color photography. In the far southeast corner of Jackson Park were
found remnants illustrating the Fair's role in promoting or illustrating urban
planning and order and the role adn advance of technology, such as a giant
incinerator- with lots of burned bones from food processing or waste. Also
found there were graphite rods from the Fair's lamps and bits of cups and
saucers bearing seal of Chase and Sanborn Coffee-- which sort of personalize
the Fair at small scale.

MARCH 29 MEETING AT LOGAN CENTER

What we learned
and what's new. And
interpretations thereof.

Sequencing
of reviews etc. The
city said it wants to do things in Jackson Park, an Historic park. This
triggers a Section 106 and other reviews. These reviews have to give some
initial guidance, but for the reviews, especially NEPA, to move to conclusion,
THE CITY (LOCAL PARTNER) HAS TO "DEFINE" WHAT IT WANTS TO DO (i.e.
give formal initial approvals (for OPC, roads, track and field) in this
case by the CHICAGO PLAN COMMISSION) and show that what it wants to do is
in and consistent with a plan for stewardship and planning for the entire
park, in this case the SOUTH FRAMEWORK PLAN, by the CHICAGO PARK DISTRICT.
ALL THESE PLANS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE FROM THE OUTPUT OF THE FEDERAL REVIEWS.
(The Plan Commission must say that in its decision.) This is necessary so
the reviews can determine if the "it" is acceptable or not.
The Section 106 May meeting then follows--will find either "No adverse
Effects" or "Adverse Effects", spelled out- in that case
goes to stage of recommending minimizing or mitigating steps, with a Memorandum
of Agreement if deemed necessary.

The Section
106 looks mainly at identification of historic properties (starting with
mapping) in the park (especially project areas) and outside affected by
projects (viewscape). It's in two parts, archeological (underground) and
architecture plus landscape. For
architecture they look for whether the project will create disturbance to
qualifying remains or whether significant new knowledge would be found from
more extensive boring or excavation-- they found it would not. For
architecture/landscape they decided to add the rest of the whole Midway
to the boundaries of the Affected Properties Areas (mainly because
of views and shadows of the OPC tower.) They chose not to add Jackson Park
Highlands or all of South Shore (because studies show the OPC and road changes
would not be visible beyond the first block that is already in the boundaries),
all of Hyde Park or all the landmarked properties therein, or 47th to 87th,
or Washington Park- latter outside the Jackson Park Landscape and Midway
National Register district. Not removed: Promontory Point. In looking at the outside architecture in the APEs, they
surveyed and documented the properties, especially that might be eligible
for NR designation, that are older than 40 years but build since the creation
of the Hyde Park-Kenwood Historic District (in the 70s?) or that might be
eligible as they reach 40 years old.
(Eligibility criteria: associated with or providing information about events,
persons, are characteristic of a type or style or likely to yield new information.)
Added to the inventory of contributing properties
since December:
1893 La Rabida peninsula historic promenade and walls
67th St. promenade (below/at South Shore Drive)

What is NOT subject to the federal reviews. ROAD CLOSURES (vs. road "improvements).
The reviews do not dictate certain preservation actions such as whether
a feature should be recommended for the National Register-0nly that certain
features are deemed eligible. (The inventory listing does clear
one hurdle for nominations because the review uses federal guideline for
assessment for nomination as eligible.)

Defining the
period of significance for Jackson Park- 1870-1953. This was challenged
by persons in the audience. The
decision was based on the impact of changes from the Nike base, filling
in the South Lagoon, and road changes that deviated more sharply than in
the past from Olmsted plans (although as pointed out there had been road
changes in the past, documented in the reports. ). They will take
another look at the end date, but indicated they will not likely undertake
new excavations, study, or change the inventory of eligible structures et
al beyond 1953.

In the Effects
identification portion of the review, there will need to be reconciliation
of the priorities and findings of the National Park Service and the Federal
Highway Administration. For
cultural landscapes they brought in expert consultants. They found lots
of changes and diminutions. The reference point was the plan of
1895.
The Effects Report will be brought out in May after looking at
all the reports and comments, and following National Register Bulletins
15 and 18 and looking especially at impacts on RECREATION, CULTURAL RESOURCES,
AND BUILDINGS. (This meeting will be workshop style.)

CDOT's rationale for
the road changes are both requirement for the OPC and for mobility improvements
for the park and neighborhoods.

The OPC has presented
its Programming Compatibility statement to the National Park Service. The
parties are in discussion.

Recreation.
Two grants (federal money) from the Urban Parks
program were received for Jackson Park in the past, making it a UPARR park,
which triggers a UPARR review when recreation facilities will be converted
to non-recreation use. Recommendation is that two baseball fields will be
displaced and must be replaced, one in the park (as is planned) and the
other, if not in Jackson, must be in a nearby park. The Park District has
proposed placing it at the east end of the Midway which area it has prioritized
for renewal. There has been objection from the Midway PAC on grounds that
a Children's Interactive Garden was suggested for that location in the 1899
framework plan. Noted elsewhere- there was strong objection to Framework
designation of that space for a garden--it was long used for recreation
fields esp. for youth and kids. When a garden was placed there, it ruined
the drainage.
The Section 106 parties and National Park service are of the position that
nay recreational use(s) is acceptable ut it must be active (not a meditative
space)- whether an interactive garden would qualify had not yet been determined.
The baseball field could go in another existing or new park. Note, once
a replacement field is built, it will in the future be subject to such review
if there are planned changes--it's carried over. There will be a community process to decide the issue this summer.
The UPARR review also considers whether an recreational use is lost to the
transportation/roadway changes.

The OPC must stage
construction only on site, in its footprint.

Comments, questions,
statements at the meeting (including the webinar)

Q and A about the replacement
2nd ball field- see section above.

What happens to the
found artifacts- can they be available for such things as education, historic
tours, exhibits?
A. Yes, such are designated for parks, will be curated by the Park District
and made available for exhibition.

Asked abut why not
survey effects on the highlands
A. OPC not visible from Highlands, which is already a conservation area
without need to research again. [ed. note.- probably also time and money].
The criteria are in relation to a project and effects of the project- for
Section 106 review on the historical integrity.
But highways effect?

More about the Highway 4(f) process
A. See tutorial linked in the tinyurl.com/jpimprovements website. US Dept.
of Transportation (DOT) must evaluate alternatives for the sake of conservation
and minimizing effects if adverse effects are found.

Request for more vegetation
analysis, especially for highway adverse effects.

Request for more information
on the inventory places-- why candidates for nomination, priorities? so
can focus research toward nominating the most significant and seek funds
for needed restorations and repairs [examples- 59th St. bridge and pier,
affected by LSD widening, Coast Guard Station, Burnham comfort station,
Iowa building].

Asserts the road changes
wouldn't be proposed, whether for conditions mitigation and improvements
if not for OPC proposal, and just accepted as necessary despite lots and
lots of likely effects.
Order and timing /staging of the road changes is not likely to work out
without a mess or taking years and years

Show the 1930s plan
of Caldwell for the western perimeter (60th to 67th which includes the OPC
APE ) and how much of that palette was implemented and remains, and use
in determination of adverse effects, including closing of Cornell Dr.
A. Can do that. Note that closing roads is not part of 106 review; will
consider effects vs. increased connectivity and access.

Opposed to elimination
of any athletic fields in Jackson Park particularly along Hayes Drive. Changing
the latter to carry more traffic and eliminate the parking will ruin the
value of the Hayes fields for sports teams, families. More free parking
is needed in general especially there.

Noted and pleased that
the report notes that Jackson Park retains historic integrity despite diminutions.
Suggests just narrowing Cornell which might limit expansion of other roads
and resulting moving of problems to these other roads. Such widenings are
a deviation from Olmsted's drawings and vision as much as the widening of
Cornell was.

Said more archeological
exploration might find more presence and information on peoples left out
of the official story of the Fair, including persons of color and women.

Said advancing a framework
plan with the new projects before approval of the latter is putting the
cart before the horse.

Said we need the projects
including golf for a number of reasons and elimination of the roads for
access and safety both for golfers and everyone else including elderly and
with disabilities.
A. CDOT noted that biking trail improvements are part of the plans and considerations.

Concerned that 1953
may preclude consideration of worthy later features and changes put in before
the 40 years ago cutoff.
A. Wrestled with this and we continue to, but the Nike-related and road
changes were striking deviations from Olmsted's vision along with changes
in park and recreation visions. Remember that the criteria here is historical
significance and integrity. Still, a cutoff does not preclude future considerations--
as (in this study) for structures in the part of APE II in the Hyde Park-Kenwood
District-- their study points out what could be eligible there.

Concern that plans
for Lake Shore Drive could impact 57th St. Beach and access.
A. Think not but will check.

UPARR recommendation
to move a lost baseball field from Jackson to east Midway.
A. There will be a community process in the summer. The UPARR recommendation
does not require putting a baseball field there.

Why is OPC going before
Plan Commission before this review done?
A. This review / NEPA require that the local partner define the project
officially so the review can determine whether it is acceptable. The Plan
Commission (and Park District for the Lakefront Plan) will have to include
that these plans are subject to change from the reviews.

What is the strategic
plan for staging/phasing the construction including particularly the road
sections?
A. It's being developed in concert with the various utilities.

Will the nominations
be reflected in the 106 report?
A. Yes.

Has the Obama Foundation
presented the Programming Plan for the Center to the National Park Service?
A. Yes, and the Foundation is in conversations with the NPS regarding its
compatibility.

Roadways have been
changing ever since the end of the Fair. Why are those since 1953 deemed
deviations when those before are not or less so?
A. We used the NPS criteria and guidelines.

How strong is the NPS
UPARR recommendation on what is acceptable recreational replacement, as
for the east Midway?
A. There is lots of leeway except the use has to be active. There will be
a community process. Parks is committed to fixing that part of the Midway.

Request for more borings
in the primary APE and around the park.

Ask about rumors of
a large staging area for OPC outside its site.
A. There will be none- it all has to be inside the OPC site. [ed. the Foundation
told the Midway PAC separately that it will not use any of the Midway for
OPC staging.]